IBT/UAL contract rejection, what does it mean to us at AA?
- Thread starter Bob Owens
- Start date
xUT said:IMHO, a closed shop is needed to ensure that 'all' members are represented equally.
You can't have 25% of a workforce paying for the other 75% in contract negotiations.
You will get inferior representation for all.
(In Theory...application is more precarious...)
Yes, that's true. Your Union screwed you. They also screwed your coworkers.
That's because he is a socialist totalitarian. He can do no wrong. Just ask him...
Of the 15+ years on this BB, IIRC, 700 has 'openly' apologized (or something like that)three times.
Rude?
Brother, you are way too nice.
Take Care and I hope you Guys N'Gals get a fair deal.
B) xUT
IMHO, a closed shop is needed to ensure that 'all' members are represented equally.
You can't have 25% of a workforce paying for the other 75% in contract negotiations.
You will get inferior representation for all.
Why would anyone even consider going Agency Fee to become dues objector?
Ok cupcake. It's simple. Along with the things we both lost which had a value, AMTs lost a higher percentage of base pay and also longevity and a full day's sick pay. In my math classes I took, 17.5% of a higher base pay is more than 15% of a lower pay. Take away longevity pay and no sick pay for the first day and the difference is even larger. Please tell me how taking a bigger pay cut was somehow less value than your lower pay cut that I had to lose the other stuff too. Obviously you cannot make that work using anyone's math, even Jim Little's. I don't have any problem with you guys making a good wage. I have a problem when they take from me so you either lose less or get more. I certainly wouldn't negotiate a pay cut for you so I could get a raise but that is pretty much what they did to us. Benefits should be the same for all work groups inside the TWU. To force inferior benefits on anyone (along with bigger pay cuts) is just plain wrong. But obviously you do not want to admit the TWU put the lion's share of the concessions on the AMTs. I just wonder how stores got to keep 6 weeks of vacation and got more % raises than we did over the last three years while also getting skill pay? Oh but we only lose half a day pay now if we're sick so we should be satisfied right? Just admit it's wrong and we can end this stupid argument. Do I also need to explain that since AMTs make more money per hour than fleet that losing holiday pay for me is a bigger value than you losing the same day? We should have got the benefits you have back in 2012 and the TWU ignored us. Name me any other union or airline that does that to one work group. You can't can you? I don't wish anything bad on you. I just want you to stop trying to tell me that we both lost the same. We didn't and you know it and trying to justify it is basically wishing bad on me.WeAAsles said:
WeAAsles said:
bull crap they laid off amts in 03 and bk contract . so your wrong again the company stopped power backing 80s and 727. and started doing push backs kept fleet there jobs. and its true ask most people if there going to get laid off any way if they rather come back to higher pay and benefits most will say yes. w why don't you tell aa you will work free to save jobs. since that seems to be most important to you. me i have over 30 years I'm going for pay and benefits . theres no more hearing the union say we will get them next time brother .
Fleet service has part-time positions. These do enable many people to downgrade from full-time, not relocate and still remain with the company. This may result in fewer no additional layoffs since people have become part-time employees. Yes, it's a kick in the teeth to lose half your income in theory but you have at least in the bigger stations the ability to make up for some of it by picking up extra hours from other people. For better or worse, mechanics do not have this option since they are full-time and if there is a rif, they are either on the street or forced to relocate.
Apparently AMTs need to pay for our jobs but nobody else does. Did you know AA keeps more FAs per flight than the FAA requires? Do the FAs have to take less for that? Absolutely not. I have a theory..... AA keeps as many people on their payroll as they choose to. They lay off when they want and they hire when they want to.conehead777 said:
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,196
- 5,343
A theory? Of course they do. And with the loss of System and Station protection language they're going to do it again and again in the future.OldGuy@AA said:
And we tried to pay to keep Cabin Service in the BK but the company wouldn't take the offer. Even after more was offered than it actually cost.
xUT
Veteran
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,196
- 5,343
WeAAsles
Veteran
- Oct 20, 2007
- 23,196
- 5,343
WeAAsles said:
We are now moving into month 6 since the start of negotiations.
The pilots and FAs were done and ratified in 4 months.
The time has long past, and we are losing money DAILY while our supposed leadership sits back with their 6 figure salaries and cushy benefits and retirement.
You have no idea what you are talking about. Do you want another POS contract full of ambiguous language where the company can screw you over any way they see fit? They are attempting to do it right for the first time in 50 years. There is language from the 1950s in our contract that needs to be rewritten.Traymark said:
So sick of people bitching about it, what are YOU doing about it?
